Contrarian point of view - I don't think it's a good strategy to be scheduling local mid-majors. If you're going to play a team like Santa Clara or USF where there's no upside and major downside, at least make them travel across the country so they're out of their comfort zone when you play them.

Bah. Win your games and stop complaining about lack of upside. I'd rather play programs that are local and known.

Winning is not easy and should never be taken for granted. I could see a scenario where next season's team gets it going later in the year but has no chance of a post season because of early losses to our local mid majors. Mid majors are always going to be more hyped to play a major conference school than the other way around. We should take any advantage possible.

What are we, wimps? We should be afraid of scheduling local teams, historical rivals, because we might lose to them? Because they might get more fired up to play us than we are to play them? We weren't afraid of losing to St. Mary's before we scheduled them last season, knowing they would probably be favored to beat us, were we?

We are talking the Golden Bears here. You know, the school that has an NCAA Championship in their trophy case. And before they ever did that, Pete Newell was not afraid of scheduling USF when they had Bill Russell, and would go on to become National Champions, was he? Newell scheduled #1 Kansas and Wilt Chamberlain home and home, and scheduled #3 Kansas State with Bob Boozer. He would turn over in his grave if he found out we might be afraid to schedule teams we might lose to. He scheduled them all, St. Mary's USF, Santa Clara, and San Jose State, in different seasons, and would do it again today, if he thought it would make his team better to play them. And you don't learn much of anything by playing a little-known team over which you are favored, and which has traveled 3000 miles to play you at Haas, is likely tired, and with none of their fans in the stands, like a Wofford. Did Cal learn anything or were they better for playing Wofford? Judging by what happened right after that in Maui, I'd say no.

To win a championship, a team has to learn how to handle pressure. Not only the pressure of playing top teams and learning to compete with them, but the pressure of playing teams who are not as good as good as your team is, and who will be more up for the game than you are. You have to learn how to win games when you are not as up as you are for Arizona or UCLA. And most teams who are not favored to beat you, are likely to be more up for beating you, especially if it is a local rival. Playing local rival games with rival fans in your house or their house gets you a little better prepared for going into the hostile arenas of Pullman, Eugene, or Tucson, where nearly all the fans will be in your face all night.

Yeah, this is pretty awful. A lot of boring match ups with some meh games sprinkled in between. BUT this squad won't be in a position to play good teams non-non anyway. Guessing Wyking really wants to collect as many wins as possible to stave off the inevitable.

Yeah, but I guess the schedule is usually pretty awful.

Last year we had games against Riverside, Cal Poly, Wofford, Chaminade, Northridge, Central Arkansas, Fullerton, Seattle and Portland State

The year before we had South Dakota State, Irvine, Wyoming, SE Louisiana, Alcorn State, Princeton, UC Davis and Cal Poly

I guess I would rather see Santa Clara, USF, San Jose State and Fresno State, rather than teams like Wofford, Alcorn State, Sam Houston State and Incarnate Word.

I bet older Cal fans will agree. I think the general public won't care. Playing USF means absolutely nothing to me. Hell, USF won't even know they're playing us outside maybe 10 people, same with Santa Clara. I don't expect this to move the needle at all in attendance.

I feel seen. Ha.

Count me among those who think the Bears should still play USF every year.

Yeah, this is pretty awful. A lot of boring match ups with some meh games sprinkled in between. BUT this squad won't be in a position to play good teams non-non anyway. Guessing Wyking really wants to collect as many wins as possible to stave off the inevitable.

Yeah, but I guess the schedule is usually pretty awful.

Last year we had games against Riverside, Cal Poly, Wofford, Chaminade, Northridge, Central Arkansas, Fullerton, Seattle and Portland State

The year before we had South Dakota State, Irvine, Wyoming, SE Louisiana, Alcorn State, Princeton, UC Davis and Cal Poly

I guess I would rather see Santa Clara, USF, San Jose State and Fresno State, rather than teams like Wofford, Alcorn State, Sam Houston State and Incarnate Word.

I bet older Cal fans will agree. I think the general public won't care. Playing USF means absolutely nothing to me. Hell, USF won't even know they're playing us outside maybe 10 people, same with Santa Clara. I don't expect this to move the needle at all in attendance.

If it is attendance you are concerned about, playing the local schools who have a history of rivalry with Cal, then it is a no-brainer to play them, instead of playing teams like Wofford, who have little name recognition in the Bay Area, and no fan base here to speak of.

Last season, Cal played local school St. Mary's to a crowd of 7,831 fans. Are you aware of the fact that the Cal-St. Mary's game drew more fans than any other Cal pre-conference game last season? Cal played 7 other games at Haas in the pre-conference season, and the average attendance was 6,710. Throw out the home opener against UC Riverside and the average was 6,650 fans. That is over 1200 more fans for Cal vs. St. Marys than the average of the other games. The Cal-Wofford game drew only 6,102 fans, the lowest attendance for any game last season. The St. Mary's game drew 1,700 more fans than the Wofford game. At say, $25 a ticket, that is an extra $43,000 in the cash register at the end of the St Mary's game compared to the Wofford game.

Add the fact that Cal played 9 conference games at Haas, and the Cal-St Mary's game drew more fans than Cal's home games against Arizona, Oregon, USC, and WSU.

St. Mary's home attendance at McKeon is about 3,000 fans. So possibly half of them attended the game at Haas. The home game attendance for USF, Santa Clara, and San Jose State runs around 2,000 fans for each one, so you might get 500-1000 more fans with any of them than you would for a game with Wofford. And that is not considering that the rivalry aspect might begin to take hold again amongst both Cal fans and opponents like St. Mary's, USF, Santa Clara, and SJS, and draw some more fans. A rivalry with Wofford will likely never take hold. Of course there is a ceiling to the attendance on any of these games with locals. But anything that might improve attendance at Cal games over last season should be done. This is likely only an experiment, for a year or two so let's see how it works out.

St. Mary's is not USF it SC. Of course it outdrew the rest of non con last year, the rest of non con was hot garbage under the sun. No one cares about those game against SC or USF. The bay will not care, they bay doesnt even care when Cal and Stanford play, of course no one will care if we play those other two that most casual fans don't even know have basketball teams. Nothing is going to develop there beyond nostalgia for a subset of Cal fans.

This is not about attendance. If Cal actually wanted to schedule for attendance it would do what we do in football and schedule pretty much any major research institution or upper tier school, because they'll have a massive alumni base in the Bay Area and send more fans here than USF and SC combined. Like when Wisconsin came.

Either way, I'm not saying NOT to schedule them. I'm just saying that overall this schedule is not a good one. Playing bad local teams in matchups that most wont care about doesn't make it any better for me.

Contrarian point of view - I don't think it's a good strategy to be scheduling local mid-majors. If you're going to play a team like Santa Clara or USF where there's no upside and major downside, at least make them travel across the country so they're out of their comfort zone when you play them.

Bah. Win your games and stop complaining about lack of upside. I'd rather play programs that are local and known.

Winning is not easy and should never be taken for granted. I could see a scenario where next season's team gets it going later in the year but has no chance of a post season because of early losses to our local mid majors. Mid majors are always going to be more hyped to play a major conference school than the other way around. We should take any advantage possible.

What are we, wimps? We should be afraid of scheduling local teams, historical rivals, because we might lose to them? Because they might get more fired up to play us than we are to play them? We weren't afraid of losing to St. Mary's before we scheduled them last season, knowing they would probably be favored to beat us, were we?

We are talking the Golden Bears here. You know, the school that has an NCAA Championship in their trophy case. And before they ever did that, Pete Newell was not afraid of scheduling USF when they had Bill Russell, and would go on to become National Champions, was he? Newell scheduled #1 Kansas and Wilt Chamberlain home and home, and scheduled #3 Kansas State with Bob Boozer. He would turn over in his grave if he found out we might be afraid to schedule teams we might lose to. He scheduled them all, St. Mary's USF, Santa Clara, and San Jose State, in different seasons, and would do it again today, if he thought it would make his team better to play them. And you don't learn much of anything by playing a little-known team over which you are favored, and which has traveled 3000 miles to play you at Haas, is likely tired, and with none of their fans in the stands, like a Wofford. Did Cal learn anything or were they better for playing Wofford? Judging by what happened right after that in Maui, I'd say no.

To win a championship, a team has to learn how to handle pressure. Not only the pressure of playing top teams and learning to compete with them, but the pressure of playing teams who are not as good as good as your team is, and who will be more up for the game than you are. You have to learn how to win games when you are not as up as you are for Arizona or UCLA. And most teams who are not favored to beat you, are likely to be more up for beating you, especially if it is a local rival. Playing local rival games with rival fans in your house or their house gets you a little better prepared for going into the hostile arenas of Pullman, Eugene, or Tucson, where nearly all the fans will be in your face all night.

I rather have success than pride. For example, look at Alabama and UW's non-conference football schedules each year. By your definition they would be wimps, yet they are 2 of the most successful teams in the country. They use strategic planning to maximize their chance at success. I'm not saying don't play challenging games, I'm saying don't play challenging games that are meaningless. Risk/reward.

Yeah, this is pretty awful. A lot of boring match ups with some meh games sprinkled in between. BUT this squad won't be in a position to play good teams non-non anyway. Guessing Wyking really wants to collect as many wins as possible to stave off the inevitable.

Yeah, but I guess the schedule is usually pretty awful.

Last year we had games against Riverside, Cal Poly, Wofford, Chaminade, Northridge, Central Arkansas, Fullerton, Seattle and Portland State

The year before we had South Dakota State, Irvine, Wyoming, SE Louisiana, Alcorn State, Princeton, UC Davis and Cal Poly

I guess I would rather see Santa Clara, USF, San Jose State and Fresno State, rather than teams like Wofford, Alcorn State, Sam Houston State and Incarnate Word.

I bet older Cal fans will agree. I think the general public won't care. Playing USF means absolutely nothing to me. Hell, USF won't even know they're playing us outside maybe 10 people, same with Santa Clara. I don't expect this to move the needle at all in attendance.

If it is attendance you are concerned about, playing the local schools who have a history of rivalry with Cal, then it is a no-brainer to play them, instead of playing teams like Wofford, who have little name recognition in the Bay Area, and no fan base here to speak of.

Last season, Cal played local school St. Mary's to a crowd of 7,831 fans. Are you aware of the fact that the Cal-St. Mary's game drew more fans than any other Cal pre-conference game last season? Cal played 7 other games at Haas in the pre-conference season, and the average attendance was 6,710. Throw out the home opener against UC Riverside and the average was 6,650 fans. That is over 1200 more fans for Cal vs. St. Marys than the average of the other games. The Cal-Wofford game drew only 6,102 fans, the lowest attendance for any game last season. The St. Mary's game drew 1,700 more fans than the Wofford game. At say, $25 a ticket, that is an extra $43,000 in the cash register at the end of the St Mary's game compared to the Wofford game.

Add the fact that Cal played 9 conference games at Haas, and the Cal-St Mary's game drew more fans than Cal's home games against Arizona, Oregon, USC, and WSU.

St. Mary's home attendance at McKeon is about 3,000 fans. So possibly half of them attended the game at Haas. The home game attendance for USF, Santa Clara, and San Jose State runs around 2,000 fans for each one, so you might get 500-1000 more fans with any of them than you would for a game with Wofford. And that is not considering that the rivalry aspect might begin to take hold again amongst both Cal fans and opponents like St. Mary's, USF, Santa Clara, and SJS, and draw some more fans. A rivalry with Wofford will likely never take hold. Of course there is a ceiling to the attendance on any of these games with locals. But anything that might improve attendance at Cal games over last season should be done. This is likely only an experiment, for a year or two so let's see how it works out.

St. Mary's is not USF it SC. Of course it outdrew the rest of non con last year, the rest of non con was hot garbage under the sun. No one cares about those game against SC or USF. The bay will not care, they bay doesnt even care when Cal and Stanford play, of course no one will care if we play those other two that most casual fans don't even know have basketball teams. Nothing is going to develop there beyond nostalgia for a subset of Cal fans.

This is not about attendance. If Cal actually wanted to schedule for attendance it would do what we do in football and schedule pretty much any major research institution or upper tier school, because they'll have a massive alumni base in the Bay Area and send more fans here than USF and SC combined. Like when Wisconsin came.

Either way, I'm not saying NOT to schedule them. I'm just saying that overall this schedule is not a good one. Playing bad local teams in matchups that most wont care about doesn't make it any better for me.

I'm sure the young men who play for USF and SC will be grateful to hear you think they are garbage. I'm sure the 2,000 fans who buy tickets to see them play will be equally grateful to know that you think they are "No one." No one at all. And the 7,000 fans and 3,000 fans who buy tickets to Stanford or Cal games will be glad to know that "the bay" (whoever that is) doesn't care that they do show up for their games.

I didn't bring up attendance. You did. You said playing these locals would not "move the needle at all in attendance." If you didn't think this was about attendance, then why bring it up. With your contempt for local basketball fans, and local teams, those fans won't be surprised when 1,000-2,000 of them show up for a game with Cal, and you declare, "they didn't move the needle," because after all, in your eyes, they are "no one". No one at all.

Yes they are "bad local teams." You do realize the Cal last season was also "a bad local team," right. Are we such elitists, are we so good, that we can not stoop to playing another "bad local team"? I'm sorry that this schedule is a bad one for you, and Cal needs to make more of an effort to make our schedule better for you.

Personally, I'm tired of watching teams I never heard of, like Wofford, or Southern, or Ball State, or Incarnate Word, play Cal. I don't say not to schedule them, but I'd like more of the local flavor for a change. I'm an old guy, and I grew up in an era when the Bay Area was the Capitol of basketball in the nation. Three national championships, a Final Four berth, and Elite 8s and Sweet 16s up the wazoo for the Bay teams, and the best players, the best coaches, the best teams were all right here in the Bay Area. One of the reasons was the youngest players were competing against each on their school teams, CYO teams, and Rec teams all year round, and they all got better that way. I'd like to see it again. Wouldn't you? Wouldn't you?

dear Socal: I'm suddenly aware of the fact that you can't possibly mean 80% of what you say. We'll allow for the other 20%. The trick is to ascertain the 20% from the other 80% chaff. I think you're depressed and/or unhappy and you know what they say about " misery loving company." when SFCB and Ursa Major and I were innocent ( meaning young) there was no greater thrill than either going live to see Cal play St. Mary's, santa Clara or USF or listening to those games on the radio. There's no reason why we can't re=create the thrills of yesteryear to the present day. As far as the schedule goes, how about thge maxim which says, "learn to walk before you can run." You are welcome. contact me. I know some good meds .

Who cares about Monty's weak non-con lineup. Let's get another game like Wisco or UVA at Haas. THOSE were brought out crowds and garnered interest. When comparing against ourselves, you don't have to compare against your weaknesses. Aim higher...

I care. When a poster writes "Guessing Wyking really wants to collect as many wins as possible to stave off the inevitable" and "from a Wyking perspective, it makes sense," I try to determine if this schedule is in fact unique as to the current head coach or is it generally the type of non-conference schedule Cal plays. If the former, it would pique my interest as to why, and I might poke around about the scheduling. If the latter, I would be curious why the typical Cal schedule has been personalized as to the head coach.

So I looked up some past schedules and came to the conclusion this one is pretty standard, but with a more local flavor. Which I like, but understand that others might not. I don't recall Cal fans clamoring for better non-conference home games in the Monty-era. I do recall such a discussion in the latter stages of the Braun-era.

Yes, higher-profile home games of course bring out better crowds and interest. Wisconsin and Virginia were terrific. I believe the SDSU game was intended as such, but they appear to be dropping off a bit post-Steve Fisher. Happens when you schedule those games a couple years in advance. SDSU and at St. Mary's are the two "high profile" non-tournament games this season. Will look into what we are working on for future home/away games.

Eric,

Most fans here seem to imply in their posts that the makeup of the non-conference schedule is the responsibility of the head coach, and imply that has been true for years. The head coach gets the praise or blame for the schedule. Is all that true? Is it entirely his decision or is it decided by committee or the AD or who?

How does the process work? Does the head coach have an idea of who he'd like to play, and then run it past the Athletic Department or the AD before contacting teams? Do a number of teams contact Cal asking for a game? Does the head coach make the final decision on who Cal gets to play? Or is it someone above him?

Just curious. Thanks.

SFCB

Generally speaking, Jay John was in charge of scheduling for several years (dating back to before Cuonzo). That responsibility has recently shifted to Foti Mellis, Cal's sports supervisor. Jay had a hand in a lot of contracts, even up to this year, because they are for series', not one-offs. Moving forward, contracts will be handled by Foti.

Most coaches are generally invested in scheduling, and Wyking is no exception. This year's schedule, however, does not really have his fingerprints on it as most non-conference games/tournaments were In the works prior to his hire.

Not sure about Knowlton, but I would certainly expect him to be invested in basketball scheduling.

Rumor is we are looking to be involved in more prestigious tournaments, and with higher profile opponents. Hope it happens.

dear Socal: I'm suddenly aware of the fact that you can't possibly mean 80% of what you say. We'll allow for the other 20%. The trick is to ascertain the 20% from the other 80% chaff. I think you're depressed and/or unhappy and you know what they say about " misery loving company." when SFCB and Ursa Major and I were innocent ( meaning young) there was no greater thrill than either going live to see Cal play St. Mary's, santa Clara or USF or listening to those games on the radio. There's no reason why we can't re=create the thrills of yesteryear to the present day. As far as the schedule goes, how about thge maxim which says, "learn to walk before you can run." You are welcome. contact me. I know some good meds .

I bet track meets were fun too. Any day now Edwards will be booming again.

Generally speaking, Jay John was in charge of scheduling for several years (dating back to before Cuonzo). That responsibility has recently shifted to Foti Mellis, Cal's sports supervisor. Jay had a hand in a lot of contracts, even up to this year, because they are for series', not one-offs. Moving forward, contracts will be handled by Foti.

i bow to no one in my appreciation of one Foti Melliswho is a legendary non-conference scheduler as well as a powerful piece of humanity. All hail Foti Mellis. Can't wait to meet him (her?)

Foti is a nice guy. I met him at my round table at the post season awards dinner one year. He's (was?) the head of compliance and explained a bit to me about how Cal athletics allows for x # of non-to-par academic qualifiers. I asked how could it be that high SAT/gpa applicants are regularly denied, but a super fast or tall athlete with NOT NEARLY such credentials gets in. He said that the athletic department has (maybe 25) slots for such candidates, and all the coaches of the various teams have to argue about getting those slots. Maybe there are different levels of slots, with there being only 5 slots for really low academics that would go to the most studly of athletes. Obviously, football and basketball get priority here, with football taking most of these slots.

Foti would most assuredly completely rewrite what I just quoted him on, but that was the gist of what I took away. He was very cool. Well spoken calm polite gentleman, engaging. This was back in the Leon Powe days.

Contrarian point of view - I don't think it's a good strategy to be scheduling local mid-majors. If you're going to play a team like Santa Clara or USF where there's no upside and major downside, at least make them travel across the country so they're out of their comfort zone when you play them.

Bah. Win your games and stop complaining about lack of upside. I'd rather play programs that are local and known.

Winning is not easy and should never be taken for granted. I could see a scenario where next season's team gets it going later in the year but has no chance of a post season because of early losses to our local mid majors. Mid majors are always going to be more hyped to play a major conference school than the other way around. We should take any advantage possible.

What are we, wimps? We should be afraid of scheduling local teams, historical rivals, because we might lose to them? Because they might get more fired up to play us than we are to play them? We weren't afraid of losing to St. Mary's before we scheduled them last season, knowing they would probably be favored to beat us, were we?

We are talking the Golden Bears here. You know, the school that has an NCAA Championship in their trophy case. And before they ever did that, Pete Newell was not afraid of scheduling USF when they had Bill Russell, and would go on to become National Champions, was he? Newell scheduled #1 Kansas and Wilt Chamberlain home and home, and scheduled #3 Kansas State with Bob Boozer. He would turn over in his grave if he found out we might be afraid to schedule teams we might lose to. He scheduled them all, St. Mary's USF, Santa Clara, and San Jose State, in different seasons, and would do it again today, if he thought it would make his team better to play them. And you don't learn much of anything by playing a little-known team over which you are favored, and which has traveled 3000 miles to play you at Haas, is likely tired, and with none of their fans in the stands, like a Wofford. Did Cal learn anything or were they better for playing Wofford? Judging by what happened right after that in Maui, I'd say no.

To win a championship, a team has to learn how to handle pressure. Not only the pressure of playing top teams and learning to compete with them, but the pressure of playing teams who are not as good as good as your team is, and who will be more up for the game than you are. You have to learn how to win games when you are not as up as you are for Arizona or UCLA. And most teams who are not favored to beat you, are likely to be more up for beating you, especially if it is a local rival. Playing local rival games with rival fans in your house or their house gets you a little better prepared for going into the hostile arenas of Pullman, Eugene, or Tucson, where nearly all the fans will be in your face all night.

Generally speaking, Jay John was in charge of scheduling for several years (dating back to before Cuonzo). That responsibility has recently shifted to Foti Mellis, Cal's sports supervisor. Jay had a hand in a lot of contracts, even up to this year, because they are for series', not one-offs. Moving forward, contracts will be handled by Foti.

Most coaches are generally invested in scheduling, and Wyking is no exception. This year's schedule, however, does not really have his fingerprints on it as most non-conference games/tournaments were In the works prior to his hire.

Not sure about Knowlton, but I would certainly expect him to be invested in basketball scheduling.

Rumor is we are looking to be involved in more prestigious tournaments, and with higher profile opponents. Hope it happens.

Thank EricBear,

I know this methodology changes over the years, based on coach, AD, etc. Also appreciate the fact, that like recruiting, scheduling is not a one-sided decision by the coach. The other program has to agree, be available and sort out logistics.

I agree with you about scheduling the Bay Area WCC Three, and I believe I was the first to post about that in this thread. I think, however, that one concern that some have has to do with NCAA tournament selections. Perhaps this year it is a moot point, however, a team's RPI suffers if they play too many cupcakes (defined by RPI) in the OOC schedule. There is a balancing act that needs to be performed--enough cupcakes to fulfill 2 criteria: more or less sure win and teams that will not require a return visit so you can pad the home schedule + higher ranking teams (usually Power 6 teams) to improve the RPI. If we can ensure that we usually play USF, SC, SMU at home (say 2-for-1 or 3-for-1), I'm all for a yearly game with each. We can't afford too many OOC road games however.

Now get a good schedule. This continues to be awful. Maybe Encinal high is available.

Lookie here, all schools play a lot of cupcakes nowadays. You just aren't going to get anywhere proposing a tough pre-conference schedule, or a schedule that does not schedule beaucoup cupcakes. Braun did it, Monty did it, Cuonzo did it.

One ranked team (Zags - #12), one SEC team, two A-10 teams, 1 AAC team. The rest cupcake or average, and some local.

The argument or debate here is about what kind of cupcake to schedule. Local cupcake, or little known cupcake with few or no recognizable players, usually a team from far away.

Which one makes the Cal team a better team? I'd say neither one, except maybe the local team puts Cal in a game with a little more pressure on them than Wofford can apply.

Which one is more interesting for fans? I'd say more fans want to see USF or Santa Clara than Wofford.

Which one costs Cal the most? Maybe you know the answer. Did Cal give Wofford more of a percentage of the gate? Did Cal have to pay for Wofford's travel? Did Cal promise to play a game in the future at their house?

I'm with you in that I'd like to see better teams, maybe not this year, but once we regain some respectability. But it is what it is, and as long as we must schedule cupcakes, let it be locals with some ties to us. Pacific should be added to the list.

I'm sad about this, but I think it is reality for most good or wanting to be good teams. D1 is just too dang large, and should be cut in half at least.

Who cares about Monty's weak non-con lineup. Let's get another game like Wisco or UVA at Haas. THOSE were brought out crowds and garnered interest. When comparing against ourselves, you don't have to compare against your weaknesses. Aim higher...

I care. When a poster writes "Guessing Wyking really wants to collect as many wins as possible to stave off the inevitable" and "from a Wyking perspective, it makes sense," I try to determine if this schedule is in fact unique as to the current head coach or is it generally the type of non-conference schedule Cal plays. If the former, it would pique my interest as to why, and I might poke around about the scheduling. If the latter, I would be curious why the typical Cal schedule has been personalized as to the head coach.

So I looked up some past schedules and came to the conclusion this one is pretty standard, but with a more local flavor. Which I like, but understand that others might not. I don't recall Cal fans clamoring for better non-conference home games in the Monty-era. I do recall such a discussion in the latter stages of the Braun-era.

Yes, higher-profile home games of course bring out better crowds and interest. Wisconsin and Virginia were terrific. I believe the SDSU game was intended as such, but they appear to be dropping off a bit post-Steve Fisher. Happens when you schedule those games a couple years in advance. SDSU and at St. Mary's are the two "high profile" non-tournament games this season. Will look into what we are working on for future home/away games.

Eric,

Most fans here seem to imply in their posts that the makeup of the non-conference schedule is the responsibility of the head coach, and imply that has been true for years. The head coach gets the praise or blame for the schedule. Is all that true? Is it entirely his decision or is it decided by committee or the AD or who?

How does the process work? Does the head coach have an idea of who he'd like to play, and then run it past the Athletic Department or the AD before contacting teams? Do a number of teams contact Cal asking for a game? Does the head coach make the final decision on who Cal gets to play? Or is it someone above him?

Just curious. Thanks.

SFCB

Generally speaking, Jay John was in charge of scheduling for several years (dating back to before Cuonzo). That responsibility has recently shifted to Foti Mellis, Cal's sports supervisor. Jay had a hand in a lot of contracts, even up to this year, because they are for series', not one-offs. Moving forward, contracts will be handled by Foti.

Most coaches are generally invested in scheduling, and Wyking is no exception. This year's schedule, however, does not really have his fingerprints on it as most non-conference games/tournaments were In the works prior to his hire.

Not sure about Knowlton, but I would certainly expect him to be invested in basketball scheduling.

Rumor is we are looking to be involved in more prestigious tournaments, and with higher profile opponents. Hope it happens.

Eric,

Thanks very much for all this information. Scheduling has to be a real juggling act, and I am glad to know that more than just one person is involved. Coaches get too much blame for the schedule, and seldom get any credit for it, IMO.

Cal will be logging more than 18,000 miles on the road. Recipe for success and growth or recipe for fatigue??

Helltopay: I moved your quote from the other thread to here...Most of the miles are done in two trips. One week in China and then to Brooklyn.A young squad could use reps at home to get started, but I don't think they will become fatigued from flying. If they lose, it's from lack of prep and experience, not jet lag.

Yes, it would be better if Brooklyn came before Christmas, not one week after China.

This got me thinking, under Cuonzo we got a Wisconsin game, 2 UVA games, and were going to play Gonzaga till we backed out of that after the Jordan Matthews situation. That was a good run in his short time here, would've been great if not for the transfer and ruffled feathers. Let's do more of that. Then we can play Berkeley high and whomever else.

Side note: We lost all three games we did play, and would have for sure lost at Gonzaga that following year, but I'm damn glad we played them. Those games were a blast. But I get it, that's not for everyone...

This got me thinking, under Cuonzo we got a Wisconsin game, 2 UVA games, and were going to play Gonzaga till we backed out of that after the Jordan Matthews situation. That was a good run in his short time here, would've been great if not for the transfer and ruffled feathers. Let's do more of that. Then we can play Berkeley high and whomever else.

Side note: We lost all three games we did play, and would have for sure lost at Gonzaga that following year, but I'm damn glad we played them. Those games were a blast. But I get it, that's not for everyone...

That is fine to have a game or two against very good teams. My problem in those years was with the rest of the schedule. In 2015, Cal had a 13 game schedule, including Wisconsin and 3 cupcakes, which is how I'd like to see it. In 2016, it was Virginia and 7 cupcakes. In 2017, it was Virginia and 6 cupcakes. I think we should replace 3 of the cupcakes with 3 average to good teams, for a little more challenging mix.

During Cuonzo's three seasons we had a team which looked good on paper at least. He had Mathews, Bird and Wallace from Monty's 2013 class, and then Cuozo got Rabb and Brown. Don't you think Cal has to be a good team or at least have highly-rated recruits for the best teams to be interested in scheduling us? Right now we are not a good team, and we have no highly rated recruits, so attracting the best teams for our schedule likely will depend on us getting one or the other, preferably both.